Post by hiredfox April 29, 2013 (11 of 34)
|
|
Chris said:
DSD is almost always slightly softer and warmer and airier than pcm imho. But I am not always so sure that 64fs DSD is in reality that much better or more accurate than DXD or even 24/192 done well.
I will listen carefully again when we return from France but if it is not DSD somebody has done a remarkable job of creating DSD-like airiness as I have never heard it before from any frequency PCM. I don't mind being proved wrong.
It is a 2-disc set by the way.
|
|
|
Post by ar80 April 29, 2013 (12 of 34)
|
|
All of these BPO / Rattle recordings (Dvorak, Messiaen, Debussy etc) were made at 44.1 KHz and 24 bit resolution and these were the files we converted into DSD to author the SACD cutting masters. There has never been any recording in DSD format in Berlin for EMI. If I may make an observation, IMHO it seems to me that this Dvorak is a fine example of a well-made recording, full-stop. The recording medium in this case is secondary to the fact that the engineers got such good results with their microphones on the sessions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
ar80 said:
All of these BPO / Rattle recordings (Dvorak, Messiaen, Debussy etc) were made at 44.1 KHz and 24 bit resolution and these were the files we converted into DSD to author the SACD cutting masters. There has never been any recording in DSD format in Berlin for EMI. If I may make an observation, IMHO it seems to me that this Dvorak is a fine example of a well-made recording, full-stop. The recording medium in this case is secondary to the fact that the engineers got such good results with their microphones on the sessions.
Wouldn't it have been more prudent to consolidate this 2 disc recording onto one single~layered multichannel SACD and charge accordingly?
|
|
|
|
|
|
ar80 said:
All of these BPO / Rattle recordings (Dvorak, Messiaen, Debussy etc) were made at 44.1 KHz and 24 bit resolution and these were the files we converted into DSD to author the SACD cutting masters. There has never been any recording in DSD format in Berlin for EMI. If I may make an observation, IMHO it seems to me that this Dvorak is a fine example of a well-made recording, full-stop. The recording medium in this case is secondary to the fact that the engineers got such good results with their microphones on the sessions.
This news seems to have given this thread a dead stop.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stvnharr said:
This news seems to have given this thread a dead stop.
Or perhaps it was my quip why this just over 80 minute album couldn't be contained on a single layered SACD (which was a stupid question, I suppose, since the Japanese always replicate the original CD release).
Ignoring the extended playing times of single layered SACDs and even BD~A is, IMO, a bummer (cannot state it more eloquently).
When will this "silly" practice cease?
Multiple discs not only increase prices but shipping costs as well (from Japan)! Ecologically unsound, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by pacwin May 1, 2013 (16 of 34)
|
|
rammiepie said:
Or perhaps it was my quip why this just over 80 minute album couldn't be contained on a single layered SACD (which was a stupid question, I suppose, since the Japanese always replicate the original CD release).
When will this "silly" practice cease?
In the hybrid case its purely maths. These are 5.1 discs. The extra channel, rather than 5.0 causes it to spill over size wise since its 20% more data (even if its mostly digital silence or in reality more compressible)
|
|
|
|
|
|
pacwin said:
In the hybrid case its purely maths. These are 5.1 discs. The extra channel, rather than 5.0 causes it to spill over size wise since its 20% more data (even if its mostly digital silence or in reality more compressible)
pacwin, I fully realize that these are hybrid discs but since EMI has released some single layered SACDs just this year (and none were multichannel) just thought it might be "interesting" to have this particular recording on 1 single layered multichannel disc.
Since the early days of SACD, seems single layered multichannel discs have been neglected as not one of the SHM~SACDs were multichannel.
And what's your personal take on hybrid vs. single layered discs, pacwin. Sonically, are the single layered discs superior in any way?
|
|
|
Post by pacwin May 2, 2013 (18 of 34)
|
|
rammiepie said:
And what's your personal take on hybrid vs. single layered discs, pacwin. Sonically, are the single layered discs superior in any way?
Once the data is on a computer they (single layer, SACD-SHM etc) are bit identical so no/zero sonic gain from my point of view (and no disc swapping!). If you play through a plastic disc spinner then there might be small sonic gains from the media itself, the green coatings, rubidium clock cutting etc but moreso with lower end disc transports I suspect.
I've never noticed anything compelling/must have about single layer using a transport (Musical Fidelity, Marantz etc). Moving a microphone an inch when recording or slumping in your listening chair might have more sonic impact. Im pretty sceptical about all the flavours of discs and only buy basaed on musical content. It certainly doesn't detract from the sound as far as I can tell. I think there are strong expectancy effects at play. You pay a premium, therefore you like to believe your wise spending should sound better.
I really dont know what the scientific arguments might be about the benefits of stripping off one of the layers. I assume its something related to lasers and light interference, laser wavelength etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
pacwin said:
Once the data is on a computer they (single layer, SACD-SHM etc) are bit identical so no/zero sonic gain from my point of view (and no disc swapping!). If you play through a plastic disc spinner then there might be small sonic gains from the media itself, the green coatings, rubidium clock cutting etc but moreso with lower end disc transports I suspect.
I've never noticed anything compelling/must have about single layer using a transport (Musical Fidelity, Marantz etc). Moving a microphone an inch when recording or slumping in your listening chair might have more sonic impact. Im pretty sceptical about all the flavours of discs and only buy basaed on musical content. It certainly doesn't detract from the sound as far as I can tell. I think there are strong expectancy effects at play. You pay a premium, therefore you like to believe your wise spending should sound better.
I really dont know what the scientific arguments might be about the benefits of stripping off one of the layers. I assume its something related to lasers and light interference, laser wavelength etc.
I suspect you're correct, pacwin about the sonic degradation when "slumping" in one's listening chair and one of my remedies (although it does have its consequences) is moving my listening position closer to the front speakers (sounds SO much better) but the rear channels are more distant which is the trade off.
As far as single layered discs.......IMO, they do have their merits. For instance, the Martinon Debussy discs from Japan are hybrids and don't sound nearly as "convincing" as Martinon's Ravel set which are single layered. Of course, differences in recording techniques could easily explain the differences and I also find the SHM~SACDs from Universal/Japan (pop, rock and jazz) to be superior to other remasterings of the same recordings but, again, this could be attributed to better masters........and all the voodoo associated with the SHM~SACD mastering process.
Thanks for your input and will be looking forward to one bit audio's upcoming BD~A listing launch from Universal/France.
|
|
|
|
|
|
rammiepie said:
I suspect you're correct, pacwin about the sonic degradation when "slumping" in one's listening chair and one of my remedies (although it does have its consequences) is moving my listening position closer to the front speakers (sounds SO much better) but the rear channels are more distant which is the trade off.
So, sit up straight or get another listening chair. Spinal degradation is a much more serious thing to worry about than sonic degradation from poor posture. Stereo listeners fortunately don't have these abidingly distressing concerns.
|
|
